You're not "sort of" a worried well.  You're the genuine article.  It was not smart to have PCR testing--which had a much higher chance of producing a false positive result (with a horrible impact on your mood!) than of detecting a real infection.  Put things in perspective:  if you're going to worry about this level of HIV risk, I have to assume you never drive, take commercial flights, or cross busy streets--all of which are hundreds of times more likely to kill you in the coming week than the chance you acquired HIV by a few episodes of oral sex.

1) The PCR window period you describe sounds about right.  6 weeks is plenty with modern HIV antibody tests; you need not wait 13 weeks.

2) Yes, saliva inactivates HIV, which is one reason why oral sex is a rare route of HIV transmission.

3) I cannot put a number to the risk, but it is literally hundreds of times lower than the chance you'll get hit by lightning someday.

4-6) Because the epidemiologic studies demonstrate an extremely low risk, no other scientifically reliable research has been done and it never will be.  Not worth the time, money, or energy to define the exact risk.  Most countries--especially where AIDS is most common--have no statistics on it.  Of course nobody has tried to use genotyping to try to document such transmission.

7) You know the answer.  Move on.

HHH, MD

Doctor! Bless you. Eventhough I am a relatively smart (I say relatively because I did get the test after all !!!) educated man, my mind has been playing tricks on me as of late. I guess I just needed to read your opinion on the subject. Keep up the phenomenal work you are doing for it is greatly needed. It is very touching to see such altruism on the part of such a reputable doctor. You truly are a scholar and a gentleman.

Thanks again, really.

Doctor, I am sorry. I forgot to ask, when you say that 6 weeks is plenty, do you recommend I still get the test done at that point or can I rely on the result I got from the previous test given the shorter window period?

90% of people seroconvert at 21 days.  That is why 6 weeks is plenty of time.  You can move on.

Thanks Sparkeler, I am aware of this. But what I mean is that I did not get the test done after 6 weeks. Eventhough the incidents were very low risk, I want to know if I should test again at 6 weeks or if a negative result from a NAT is definitive after 16 or 22 days.

Doctor, I am not certain you have seen my last question. Is my negative result from the NAT definitive at 16 and 22 days or should I, aside form peace of mind reasons, retest at 6 weeks. I promise I'll move on after this!

Come on, man!

Don't you think if he thought for an instant you needed ANY testing, he would have told you?

He has said time after time after time, that oral sex has a negligible risk.  He does not recommend even testing after an incident (or even several) like that.  You didn't even need the test you had.  

Generally, the only reason he even suggests testing to the worried well, is to try to ease their minds with a negative result.  Unfortunately, it seems that even a negative result doesn't do it.  

You're obviously right! If you guys beat my head in sufficiently, it will eventually sink in! Thanks for caring enough to reply, it's greatly appreciated ! :-))